From Godwin Tsa, Abuja
After a marathon proceedings on Thursday, the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) reserved ruling till a later date on the application by former vice president, Atiku Abubakar and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) for live broadcast of the court’s proceedings.
The Justice Haruna Tsammani led five-member panel made the announcement counsel to parties in the petition argued and adopted their respective briefs for and against the motion.
Lead counsel to the petitioners’, Chris Uche had prayed the court to grant the application for the overall interest of the public and the nation.
He equally argued that being a unique electoral dispute with a peculiar constitutional dimension, it is a matter of public interest whereof millions of Nigerian citizens, voters and stakeholders have constitutional right to receive.
Uche further submitted that “the matter before the Honourable Court is a dispute over the outcome of the Presidential Election held on 25th February 2023, a matter of national concern and public interest, involving citizens and voters in the 36 States of the Federation and the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, who voted and participated in the said election; and the International Community as regards the workings of Nigeria’s Electoral Process.
That it is an integral part of the constitutional duty of the Court to hold proceedings in public is a discretion to allow public access to proceedings either physically or by electronic means.
“With the huge and tremendous technological advances and developments in Nigeria and beyond, including the current trend by this Honourable Court towards embracing electronic procedures, virtual hearing and electronic filing, a departure from the Rules to allow a regulated televising of the proceedings in this matter is in consonance with the maxim that justice must not only be done, but must be seen to be done.
“Televising court proceedings is not alien to this Honourable Court, and will enhance public confidence.
But in opposition, counsel to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Abubakar Mahmoud, the President-elect, Wole Olanipekun, and the All Progressives Congress( APC), Lateef Fagbemi urged the court to reject it.
Arguing separately when the matter was called at the PEPC, the respondents said live telecast of proceedings could ridicule the traditional solemn nature of court proceedings.
While describing the motion as strange and an abuse of court process, they submitted that the court is not a rostrum or a soapbox and not also a stadium or theatre and arena for public entertainment.
They added that the court has met the constitutional requirement by making sufficient arrangements for the public to follow the proceedings by allowing a large media presence and providing huge television screens at the court’s foyer.
In his submissions, counsel to INEC, Mahmoud said “the court has already met the constitutional requirements in holding court in public by the presence of different media houses in court.
“Bringing live coverage of court proceedings will defeat the solemn atmosphere of the court. The courtroom is for serious business.”
Mahmoud added that in other jurisdictions where this is obtainable, there are strict control and regulations governing live streaming of court proceedings.
“There is an implicit suggestion in the application that unless the proceeding is televised, it is not public.This is not true as the courtroom is a public place and it is accessible to all, subject to availability of space,’’ he submitted.
In his submissions, counsel to Tinubu, Olanipekun urged the court to dismiss the application with cost, “because it is an application which ought not be brought.”
He added: “ An Area Court cannot grant this order contained in the application.The court is not a stadium or a crusade ground. It is not a theatre or circuit show.
The application, he further argued, touches on a policy decision of the President of the Court of Appeal, through a practical direction before the court can grant it.
Olanipekun admonished the court not to make and order it cannot enforce or supervise.
On his part, counsel to APC, Lateef Fagbemi submitted that there is no allegations before the court that its proceedings are not widely covered by the media as required by law.
He urged the court to refuse the application for security reasons especially the safety of the Justices and lawyers prosecuting the petitions.
Fagbemi who likened the televising of court’s proceedings to the ‘Big Brother Naija “, series, said that the application if granted will invade the privacy of even the judges.
He further claimed that if granted it would lead to a situation where petitioners in governorship, National and State Houses of Assemblies election would be demanding for live streaming of their proceedings.
“We don’t have the structure and facility, no policy document” he said, stating that even in climes where televising of court’s proceedings are permitted, it is still limited; excluding when witnesses are giving evidence.”
After listening the all the submissions of counsel, the tribunal announced that its ruling is reserved to a later date.